tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN November 5, 2014 7:30pm-9:31pm EST
recognition there. it is my sense what he is signaling he cannot reach the end of conflict agreement with you because not because you cannot agree on borders if you're prepared to be flexible not because you cannot agree on this as a willing partner on security issues i am sure because the understands how much in the crazy middle east how dependent she is on israel as a strong neighbor. that he cannot agree on the refugee issue and on that hot issue in deduce every
day or who owns the temple mount and he knows it. he does not believe he can negotiate these issues because you make the point that resonates why should we give up the west bank in return for something that is less that leaves these issues open and festering? so he goes to the un. that question you have to ask yourself a strategy for the palestinian issue that leaves the democratic state state, what has to be the prime is really interest in a deal with the palestinians?
is it getting them to renounce the hard help position like right of return and the temple mount or is it getting it out of the west bank with adequate security provisions? if the latter i think it is possible with american help perhaps in the international arena but maybe bilateral to make progress of a two-state solution to leave the heavy narrative issues like the temple mount 3,000 years old to leave them for the future that this is the only chance i see today. and frankly you have not
been oriented in this direction to be open to a very sharp criticism to the territory on the west bank with no serious confessions and because some of your coalition partners value a jewish state is a very, very hard decision for you to make and we cannot be sure number one or never to here i come back to one of my important points that united states and its current profile of downsizing its involvement would be prepared to make this happen. the looking at the platform
i assume it is the same if he tries again, he still comes into the attempt to reach agreement after 20 years of trial and error and failure without having drawn conclusions from the failure he cut his hand with this statement zero that failed in camp david in 2000 and i would be very happy if next time you sat him down to explain this to him and call me on the private citizen i would do that as well. >> i am persuaded after the midterms in 2015 the secretary will make another run and this challenge could
be the greatest challenge that i face i will call when you for your advice they give for your service. >> with plenty of time that remains we would like to go to your questions. please identify yourself. questions please. there is a microphone. >> i have two quick questions. yesterday in this building to the global rise of anti-semitism. what could israel we doing to counter that? with lebanon and jordan or
whatever in syria where do they fit in how do they get into a peaceful settlement? >> i am speaking as to? [laughter] you point to two important issues that they did not mention global anti-semitism was undoubtedly fueled by what happened is in gaza and will be fueled by any new blower with anybody. the way we're looked at today. they're plenty of double standards with confusion of the borderline between legitimate opposition to the policies and anti-semitism.
at the end of the day we have to recognize with millions of palestinians that is the way the world sees us and will continue whenever the justifications are the longest occupation i think in the international community. but we will be hard put and there are elements here that are not in our control.
notice the anti-semitism and university campuses almost monopolistic. by of a copy? stop at the airport. go to the library. and read the whole loss -- the hamas charter. it will not go away that dilettante -- militant islam will rise with that. the one area i would point to it is not easy but keep that in mind. three years from now everybody does it like israel for whatever reason
so get ready for that. refugees in my view and i am hardly a hawk that is the disaster. been concept it is a disaster there are good people. to have critics and educate palestinians but the concept is a disaster to keep the conflict alive were perpetual refugees exist. i speak i and the son of a refugee my mother was 100 years ago.
and with those refugees die of old man. the des moines agree come to terms to negotiate on this issue those that might return with the clinton parameters so on and so forth but with the palestinian demand israel except their rights that means that the state of israel was born so we will build a healthy relationship the closer we have got into that it is obvious we are not in the closer to solve the issue. i don't know if this is the cause or the fact i don't think it prevents agreement or an agreement to set the issue aside then certainly the concept that was
extremely problematic i remember coming back as a lonely the tenants and we all said we can dismantle. now we can head into the camps into gaza and we got into the camps and realized we will take all this? the schools and clinics and multimillion-dollar annual budget? they serve a useful person -- purpose with no resolution of the issue. it is very complex and it has to be addressed and it isn't. >> it is always good to have you here yossi. welcome back.
we have met a number of times. >> economic conferences. >> if you become mossad director that is fine with me. so i am the daughter of of a refugee from nazi germany he left in 1935 and was lucky to find a sponsor here and you make a valid point they're all kinds of refugees not just palestinian but your comments about u.s. role in the middle east you said was downsizing. if president obama were here i don't think he would say that but he was or has been to end to popular wars where we had the strategies that were not successful but not to downsize the role but to change its.
i think the intervention in the isis issue is an attempt to confront a new challenge that is different from prior efforts. i just want to make that claim. but a big part of the action against isil is an effective counter narrative. we see it can only go so far. you said supported egypt current government which is authoritarian is more cars than the mubarak government effort was is in his interest of my question is, if the u.s. supports each shift government and
that transition with much tougher authoritarian rule will that generate a counter narrative in the region to be helpful to defeat the kind of threat that isil is? and also ultimately could be a threat to you also because it could hurt your friends like jordan. >> first of all, i agree isil alternately is a threat to us all though we're not at the top of the hate list they made that point quite interesting but let me begin with the intervention and i do have something to say. and in my eyes to represent
the official point of view bet speaking for most israelis the u.s. intervention is very perplexed the president who backed down from a side because of public opinion and risk averse to americans are be headed and there he goes. with a dynamic that in my view is almost certain to windfalls boots on the ground in order for anything to move. i a very troubled by the administration's insistence to keep iraq whole. resisting kurdish independence working with
iran to prop up the shiite dominated government to rejuvenate an army that u.s. trained and completely failed then if you do it again it will succeed this time and all this facilitating that access through friends in baghdad and damascus and to the shores of the mediterranean. inside the nuclear issue for the sake of argument it is very perplexing. >> obama would say he is not doing that but by departing that government in iraq he
is real and powering them. he would say boots on a grounder not from the u.s. because of the changed dynamic. >> but with that exact scenario you may recall in july the pride minister early in the war against hamas in the course of a speech publicly welcomed kurdish independence. a statement not solicited by the kurds even though our alliance, our good relationship goes back many decades. but what he was saying at the time is its u.s. insist
that kurdistan not be independent because it has to be for iraq is not part of israeli interest not just because we like to see the independent kurdistan and i assume he made this clear to obama with direct conversation. we know there are people like vice president by dan to talk about a more decentralized iraq and that makes more sense. here you go back to obama as saying we don't have a strategy yet. because so many do not have viable strategy used the license is there still is no clearer understanding of what has to be done with the overall interest not just to israel but the neighbors as
well. this is what leads us uncomfortable. in many ways from the israeli standpoint weakness and ongoing warfare it makes more sense than a strong iran back to syria. and had they been stable under shiite rule i go back to meet urgent issues there at the borders with 100,000 rockets. we just went through a war with on a 10,000 rockets that only took two months to figure out.
hamas does not move without iran and iran does not look without that broad situation though whole can of worms and i fully sympathize to anyone who cannot figure out how they can come up with a rational strategy but you have to try harder. >> the last part of my question supporting authoritarian governments which israel is now doing will creates a dynamic impression of young people who decide which side to be on will reduce the threat or not? >> on this issue i will tell you on the one hand we have admirably avoided nobody can accuse us from the beginning
from tahrir square we are small and surrounded by a growing collection and you have to forgive us to make short-term calculations as to what can keep peace and quiet but can spill over our borders? despite our cooperation with egypt to wait think cc is good? no. but permit me not to think about it because i will not get involved in any way. if the u.s. seeks to get involved i wish it success but all i can go is say look you make things worse. this study and dirty and
narrative you make things worse by pushing out mubarak and by trying to get cozy with morsi. you make things worse with cc. you have to have leased reassess that that given the fact ultimately we have to come to terms with is lomb and the demographic resolution in the middle east is done answered by circumstance. >> i want to ask about the urgent points that you talked about with yemen and the takeover with the threat
that iran causes in the region. could you please tell us why that is so important and what are you doing about it? >> that is a great question i will try not to talk too long but to mention nine of the author of a forthcoming book this search for middle east allies which goes back to the doctrine of the '50s and '60s and '70s one of the paradoxical aspects we were involved to support what was known as royalists in yemen fighting against a so-called revolution and by the
british from road or to a deniable operation. because. >> caller: airdrops of weaponry who were then supported by the saudis iran was not around. that made it much easier to win the six day war. what is the interest now what has it been? without refueling say 30 our flights. but that's nasser wed take control.
and in syenite is another chokepoint. so we invested quite a bit in this now the context is much broader does this is the same iranians in bob rae and anti-iraq now on a different front been yemen. with our eyes broadly speaking this year i ran will have of the middle east deployment. item of any israeli involvement headed is largely a saudi problem but if i could command to you that until now was a civil
war that was a shiite confrontation grosso arab iranian. in that coincides the egyptian interests as well. >> my name is steven. adducing teheran has a strategy in relation to israel? >> i believe the regime in iran has had a strategy and a strong anti-israel's strategy since it came into existence. yes.
listen to them. they openly seek if not the destruction but at least the end of israel. is this the highest item on the strategic order of priorities? absolutely not. they certainly seek to expand their influence with the use of shiites in various places in the middle east. though we are clearly on their agenda. and this explains to some extent the alliance with has a law in southern lebanon and the buildup of what can only be termed quite impressive deterrent against israel but also used to
aggress israel as well. didn't make mistakes? without a doubt. the primary mistake since the revolution of 79 is periphery nostalgia. prominent israelis you think if we just tweak the right way, the regime will collapse or potentially. israeli elements there and somehow can be reversed. i see this regime as relatively stable, long lasting with the clear sense of the strategic cooked -- strategic priorities they will not give up israel easily. what sort of resources we can and should devote to this with a list of security
>> good afternoon. thank you for coming. my name is richard viguerie and we have six of the most important conservative leaders. they had up basic conservative organizations in these organizations were in the forefront of the effort by conservatives to define this election to help nationalize the election around important conservative issues such as no amnesty national security and the obama administration's culture of lies lawlessness and corruption. i will speak for a few minutes and then i will introduce each conservative leader in alphabetical order and they will speak for a few minutes. then we will open it up for questions.
this election was a rejection by the voters of both the chamber of commerce and obama's failed agenda. every republican candidate ran as a born-again conservative campaigning in opposition to obama's big government policies. once again we see when republicans present a conservative alternative to the democrats big government policies the voters reward them with a big victory as they did when reagan ran for president in 1980 and gingrich's contract with america in 1994 and a great tea party victory of 2010 however when these same republicans present a we all get along was compromised government agenda to the voters the voters deal them a big defeat as they did in 2006, 2,002,012. the voters gave the republican party a mandate to do what is necessary to undo abstract and oppose all of obama's efforts to
ignore the constitution and fundamentally change america. our america. no republican ran on a platform of cooperation conciliation and compromise with president obama. the democrats like many military leaders made a huge mistake and thought this -- fought this campaign on issues the issues the past campaigns such as war, funny warned them in class warfare racial divide and the republicans campaigned on issues of 2014 such as no amnesty protect our borders national security american exceptionalism less government intrusion and regulation of our lives free-market policies of building xl pipeline lower taxes etc. etc.. regulate conservatives asked me how can we defeat hillary hillary clinton in 2016 and i have a very simple answer. nominate a limited government constitutional conservative who's not part of fake phony washington government. based on the comments by some
republican leaders since the polls closed yesterday they may be backtracking on repealing obamacare. it's clear there's a major divide between republican leaders and the voters. the bible tells us in lincoln told us a house divided cannot stand. today the republican party is still very much a house divided. we will now hear from ken blackwell former ambassador to the united nations human rights commission. >> thank you richard. those standing before you today represent organizations that are in touch and integrated well with the grassroots of america. as we crisscross this country and we watched the elections become nationalized we in fact noted those issues that mobilized and energized the base
voters that turned out to give the republicans a clear majority in the senate and an overwhelming majority in the house. beef up national security, repeal obamacare and stop amnesty and other forms of lawlessness. let me be clear, we watched over the course of this campaign soccer moms be transformed to security moms, national security is a primary issue before this new republican majority. one of the things that became clear is that there is an expectation that we will have a defense budget adequate to make the current and future threats to our country including threats from radical jihad-ism as well as nonstate actors and sovereign
states. what we didn't see yesterday, what we didn't hear from the voters was that they were sending a new republican majority to act like a minor-league republican or minor-league political party. they are the majority party in this country across the state legislatures and governors. underscore this. at the end of the day they did not send republicans, the new republican majority to be competent managers of big government. they sent a message that they wanted leaders that would put us back on a course of limited government come expanding economy that would put americans back to work and make sure that we generated state revenue to take care of our federal
government's first responsibility and that is to keep our families safe. >> thank you can. next day that bossie president of citizens united. >> thank you richard. i'm going to be very brief. it was a wonderful evening last night because conservatives ideals won the night and it really proved that barack obama and harry reid have been a national embarrassment for the last six years. failed leadership, failed policy agendas and a disaster called obamacare. so let's face it come in september and october when we are trying to gut the first amendment of the united states instead of trying to create jobs come instead of trying to fix the economy you know their priorities are in the wrong place.
citizens united are supreme court case level the playing field and we are very proud of the impact that had on last night's elections. a robust conversation -- conversation which is what a level playing field allows really creates an opportunity for the american people to get information and make good decisions. our future. we need to focus on doing the things that we promised during this election cycle and that is repealing obamacare. that is stopping amnesty and that is cutting spending, decreasing the size and scope of government and i'm just going to say last night i heard one of the republicans leaders on tv say you know i don't know if we are going to be able to repeal obamacare because we need to go first and foremost to fix the
economy. my message to the republicans in the house is repeal obamacare is fixing the economy. because of small businesses that are not able to hire. it is big businesses that are being impacted by the sheer cost of obamacare. citizens united health care premiums are going up by 45.5% this month. that is an increase that is affecting every business in america and if we can fix that we can create jobs and create an atmosphere of growth and opportunity. so i'm excited about what went on last evening. i want to make sure that the republicans hear what these conservative leaders are talking about because it is those promises that we made last nig night. it is the promises that the candidates made that they have to live up to and that is what
we are here for is to make sure that we help them along with that promise. thank you very much. >> thank you david. next would hear from brent bozell founder president of for america. >> thank you richard. thank you for putting this on. the gop won a great victory last night because every single one of its candidates ran as a conservative and the conservative base hearing far left policies and the fact that they are destroying this nation came out in droves. voters spoke loudly and clearly and rejected big government. it's very important to stress this. not one candidate ran as a moderate. not one. the voters who voted for these candidates are not going to stand for business as usual farm republicans painting as conservatives and governing as moderates.
republicans won the victory because every single winner successfully campaigned on a promise to repeal obamacare. every house and senate will have repeal when i formally take this the sin and generated as a unanimous ramaz to the american people to be against this. it's time to do it and stop talking about it. the republican party ran over 35,000 television ads on obamacare alone in the month of october a loan. they spent hundreds of millions of dollars overall. it's a moral obligation have to follow their campaign promise and pass legislation to repeal obamacare. the first act of the new majority in congress must be to keep its promise. finally moves to repeal obamacare as fast as the doors of new congress thing open. council president to veto this
legislation. take that veto to the american people. have a debate. republicans will win the presidency in 2016 i guarantee it. conservatives will hold each and every single republican candidate who won last night accountable for his or her promises. they need to join senator -- and making clear if this is the number one priority of the repeal majority. anything less is a trade-off and conservatives will not forget. a republican can forget winning the white house in 2016 if this is the case pledges must be honored. the gop must reject his professional consultants and stop governing as big government republicans. this will be a prescription for political and policy failure. last night was a referendum and the voters said enough of this. in conclusion, last nights results were not all that surprising. when the gop runs against the government and all conservative
issues it wins elections. history bears this out. in 2014, 2010, 2004, 2000, 1994, 1988, 1984 and 1980 were all banner years for conservatives when they ran as moderates in 1992, 2000, 2012 they lost every single time. let this be a warning shot to all 2016 gop presidential candidates. no more moderates. if you want to keep your majority keep your promises. celebrate today. you earned it. get to work tomorrow. >> thank you brent. next would hear from marjorie dannenfelser president of susan b. anthony list. >> thank you richard. while the bottom has fallen out of the abortion center war on women's strategy. why is that? it is just the truth that women
don't agree with the shrinking ranks of me were all that unlimited unrestricted abortions are the great liberator for women. that did not hold and that is why we will not see again an election fought on the democratic terms in such a manner where abortion is at the center of the scene. american women and frankly all americans are tired of the politics of division that have come from that elite guard at emily's list in a row. consider this. emily's list endorsed women chose to remain silent on the issue of abortion this election. that is unheard of. it used to be only for republicans in previous elections that did that. why did they do that? emily's list and campaign consultants told them to button it up on abortion. don't speak of it because you will be out of sync with your constituents.
kay hagan michelle nun and alison grimes all voted to unlimited abortion as a fundamental right and chose to focus on other issues. clarity on abortion was the enemy for them. as we have always said and we have seen hiding from this issue is impossible. our candidates to stood strong and firm of these three women were resoundingly defeated. today more than 200 women speak out activists in louisiana who were going door-to-door to pro-life voters for kerry on their jobs and work to see another emily's list of favorite mary landrieu. he pro-life label while floating pro-abortion all along. they have helped her in her -- and we believe our ground game will help her out the door. to be said abortion was used as an issue by pro-abortion candidates those candidates
suffered a backlash. consider wendy davis in texas mark udall in colorado and bruce bailey in iowa. wendy davis ran from a platform of late-term abortions in texas and it was too late to put that back in the box. he was just too late especially among hispanics. in colorado even "the denver post" as saying mark udall for his over-the-top focus on abortion and women's reproductive capacity as the defining point of her life. meanwhile our candidates and their opponents tended to avoid backlash. joni ernst a pro-life mother military veteran and longtime public servant refused to back down from her pro-life record even in the face of outrageous attacks from braley and naral. when asked his position in braley directly lied to state moderators about his position on late-term abortion. he just plain lied. that's one way of handling it
and then there's another way, literally run away which is exactly what brent orman did when he was running against pat roberts in kansas any literally ran away from a voter who was asking his position on late-term abortion and of course that is captured on film. men and women voters alike responded positively to the pro-life candidates who stood firm on principle. they were supported by the susan b. anthony list and women's super pac our aggressive defense on the-gram. the counterstrike to the warren women expose pro-abortion incumbents and their radical positions on abortion then turned out those voters in an unprecedented ground game in arkansas louisiana north carolina and kansas. we have more than 7000 pro-life activists make almost 1 million contacts. more than half of those door-to-door, human-to-human, woman to woman interactions
about what mattered in their lives and what didn't. they committed -- communicated on late-term tax funded abortion. we now i have a senate that is more human when it comes to women's politics. it's reflective of the women of america not a minority, money, power elite who often have men and children as obstacles to our success. we are encouraged with the new pro-life senate will take senator mcconnell's commitment to take the pain capable bill up and make sure there is a voter leon in the first 100 days to take him up on that offer. we will not forget it and we know he will not. in attacking joni ernst last week, in summary hillary clinton said it's not enough to be a woman. you have to be committed to expand the rights and opportunities for all women. this attack against joni ernst given her incredible war hero
and human being that she is. abortion centered warren women strategy is dead just because of the straitjacket style of cynicism that you must complete a test before you can be considered a woman by a small group of women who have been running much of women's politics. it is because of the spirit of susan b. anthony to 100 years ago today passed a vote. she believes very strongly you never build rights on the broken lives of other human beings. she went arm in arm with frederick douglass to the republican convention thing we rise and fall together. she did not believe in abortion. she knew it would hurt her woman's conscious in life. she is her inspiration and thank goodness we are returning women's politics to her model of what what women in politics ought to be. thank you.
>> thank you marjorie. next we will hear from jenny beth martin co-founder and president of tea party patriots. >> for republican leaders speaker john boehner and the house and pursue majority leader to be mitch mcconnell in the senate i have two words. earned this. live up to your promises, repeal obamacare. use reconciliation to pass the bill repealing obamacare and put it on the president's desk. let him veto it and draw lines in the sand. secure the border and block the president's plan to executive amnesty. maintain the rule of law and improve that we as a country as we have been for more than two centuries are a nation of laws, not of men.
last night in the midst of what should've been a celebration i had reason for concern because of her press release issued by speaker boehner's office. in this release speaker boehner lays out an agenda for the 114 congress. he says republicans in the house will do jobs legislation, get energy legislation, tax reform legislation and spending reform legislation. legal reform legislation and regulatory reform legislation and education reform legislation. obamacare is mentioned nowhere. neither is securing our border or blocking the president's planned executive amnesty. i can tell you having traveled from new hampshire to oregon from nebraska to texas from florida to iowa in the last six months and working with tea party activists around the country at the local level in battleground states and
districts, there were two issues that propelled the two victory mr. speaker. obamacare, securing our border and blocking the planned executive amnesty. one of two things is true. either obamacare and illegal immigration were left out of the press release deliberately or by mistake. if it was a mistake the speaker needs to make that clear immediately by issuing a revised release today on the agenda for the next congress that includes these important issues. if on the other hand it was done deliberately, then clearly we have a problem. the two issues that motivated the tea party activist to get their neighbors and friends to the polls in this election should be the two issues the republican congress addresses immediately. the time is now.
the american people have spoken. they have decisively rejected these policies. we are calling on congress to act in a manner deserving of their majority. you need to live up to your promises. you need to earn them. >> thank you jenny beth. next tony perkins president of family research council. >> thank you richard. i first would like to congratulate the candidates and not only those who won last night but those who were in the arena. our system works because people are willing to make themselves candidates, to get into this arena and our public and take the hits, take the shots, work hard, raise money, sell their ideas and speak with the american people. that's what makes her system
work so i congratulate all of those who were candidates last night in this election but i also want to congratulate those who went to want to congratulate republicans. in particular i would like to point out the rnc and reince priebus and the work they have done in wing infrastructure. not necessarily supporting candidates but so the infrastructure of the cans could be successful. they have covered a lot of ground in closing the gap between republican and democratic parties and they need to be commended for that. what we will see in january and this new congress will be the most pro-life congress since roe v. wade. almost every new gop senator being strongly pro-life. this is significant. we look for liberals to start searching their new battle plan as their fictitious war on women fail to serve as a decoy that they hoped it would be in attracting away from the failed
policies of barack obama. president obama was not on the ballot yesterday put his policies certainly were. the american people have chosen to send a message by republican express. they have sent a message to washington that americans have had enough of the president's failed policies that have hampered our economy, endangered our national security, threatened their families and trampled upon our religious freedoms. enough is enough. now the ability of the republicans to take and keep this new congressional majority has paved the way for the gop to the white house in 2016 will require them to use this majority. i do not believe the american people have hired them to babysit america's demise. they have elected republicans to undo the damage done by this president and return america to its condition of strength
domestically and internationally. we stand ready to work with that new majority to accomplish these goals of making america an exceptional nation once again. but time is not on our side. the policies of this president have truly heard our great nation. and we must immediately begin to work in rebuilding america both domestically and on foreign-policy front. >> thank you tony. we will take questions. please identify yourself and if you want to ask a particular participant please identify who you want to answer your question. any questions? yes, maam. >> senator cruz when asked if he would support mitch mcconnell as majority leader, do you
support mitch mcconnell and ship the base concern other options? >> who would like to answer that? >> i have been around the base enough time to know that that decision will be made by the respective caucuses and we in fact really do plan to articulate agenda and to establish the expectations that what we expect to get done. that is our goal. that is our objective and then we in fact leave it to the majority of the republicans who are in the senate and in the house to pick their leaders. >> this is not about personality come it never has been. it's about policy.
if senator mcconnell does what he pledged to do we are going to be thrilled and i think i can speak for everyone behind me that we will throw a thing we have behind them if he does what he campaigned on. we will wait and see if he does it but i hope you will. >> any other questions? do you have a follow-up? >> there is government funding and at a press conference earlier he was asked if obamacare should be defunded in a bill that during the lame-duck or never should be made in january. obviously we all want a full repeal that is either not happening or not happening with the president. what are your thoughts, do you think it should be an issue in the december funding to be held for later point in how aggressive should republicans be
in using their spending legislation to get that done? >> 30 organizations signed a letter that should be made available. our overarching objective if it makes it to the lame-duck is that there be no lame-duck surrender. we will in fact engage as we have with the leaders and the folks who we helped to elect to make sure nothing is lost in a lame-duck session. as we craft the strategy as it relates to obamacare we have laid out what we expect and that is a full repeal. >> david. >> a month ago to establish and said they made a mistake when
there was a fight over funding of obamacare and the funding resolution. how would you look back on that and for anyone how has the shutdown impacted the election? >> who look back on this with regret? who did you say you look back on this with regret or something? >> no, no, as mike is making it hard to hear. how do you look back on that and how did it end up shaping the election? >> i hope that some of you guys in the press will explore this about what shutdowns do and don't do and what causes and doesn't cause shutdowns and what are the effects or not the effects of shutdowns quick of shutdowns quits first of all the republicans never shut down the government. it's the president to shut down the government. secondly justice in 1994 it had zero impact on the race.
as a matter fact a poll by one of the news organization said 35% of the public blamed republicans in 39% went obama and the rest didn't give a dam. what's more important is this congress address the will of the american people and there are all sorts, not just obamacare that needs to be addressed when the federal government is taking taxpayer money and having a free-for-all. i would say not just obamacare but a whole host of things that need to be addressed. >> yes, maam. >> does anybody have a comment on appointments made in the lame-duck? >> to make reference to what ken said there's a statement available for the conservative action project was which is a coalition of 100 different conservative organizations across the country.
the statement that was released this morning is signed by 38 conservative leaders. what they're looking for in a lame-duck session if there is no surrender on anything whether that be fiscal issues, and none of this measure being pushed through or judicial nominees or the attorney general position that the republicans hold the line and use whatever means available. i think the american people get this, especially those who voted in yesterday's election depending on the state, depending on the candidate and how they ran as conservatives, the turnout was higher. we saw an increase in the percentage of evangelical social conservatives voting in this last election. we saw a decrease in those under 29 voting. we saw an increase in those over 65 voting so we saw increases among those who were concerned about the direction of this country. that doesn't end today.
it didn't and last night. i think what you're going to see is a more engaged electorate that is going to follow through on their vote. that's why think it's important for the republicans and we were supportive of many of these candidates. i was out there campaigning with them and they got it. even mitch mcconnell yesterday said i have heard you. i have been listening. so i believe that in the short period of time with the lame-duck the american people's message got through. if in any form or fashion republicans retreat on these values, these these issues that they campaigned on during the lame-duck is going to be problematic for the republicans. so i see them holding strong and i see the american people backing them up in opposition. >> yes maam and please identify
yourself. who were you with? >> i am an islamic lobbyist on capitol hill. i have my own lobby for them. my question is about conservatives speaking out to the muslim-american population to deal with the national security challenges we are facing. i wanted to get your comments about specifically islamic values aligning more with the conservatives conservatives. we are pro-life, pro-business, less taxes, family values and all of that and i want to know how we can partner and work together to address america's challenge is? >> we welcome your participation in this press conference. as was indicated the conservative faction is made up
of well over 100 organizations and each of the organizations to varying degrees interact with a diverse cross-section of our country. there are muslim americans who are constitutionalists who work within that framework in many of our organizations so we encourage that continue. >> any other questions? [inaudible] >> is there an overall strategy that conservatives are rattling around right now? >> we work with a number of organizations again numbers usa,
the club for growth and a number of organizations that have varying positions on immigration policy in general as it relates to protecting our borders and arresting an executive overreach on amnesty. i think we are almost 100% united. our strategy is as brent indicated by any legitimate means necessary to stop that. that includes not funding his executive overreach we will go that route. i would hope that the president will have gotten a message too, not just republicans. the president should have gotten the message from these returns. we did nationalize the agenda. as he indicated his policies
were on the ballot and they were roundly rejected. hopefully the president will in fact come to his senses, sit down and take a rational approach to the mass that has accelerated on his watch. >> all the polling data shows this is one of the tipping point and issues to the american people have no interest in a firmly unequivocally opposed to discussion of unilateral amnesty by the president. republicans all campaigned against it. promises, promises, pledges, pledges. if they turn around and fund it then they are guilty of it as well but even worse. they will have lied to the
constituents who put them into office. so i would hope that the president wouldn't do it but if he does i would expect the republicans to stand up to him and the first thing you do is tell them no mr. president we are not going to fund your lawlessness. >> to reinforce what mr. ken blackwell said a message that was sent by the voters yesterday was not just to president obama and the democrats but it was equally for the washington republicans rate the voters have spoken loud and clear and i would hope our politicians both republicans and democrats were listening. any other questions? >> the republican leadership and the senate will be able to effectively aggregate their voices within their own party?
>> no. >> sometimes that's like herding cats. we get it but i think this election as johnny depp and others said we have some from the same hymnal. it's very clear that the issues that drove the debate and gave us an historic majority. i want to underscore something. the republican party cannot act as a minority party. we have 31 governors. we have more state legislature chambers then we have had since the great depression. we cannot act inside of the beltway describing this conversation as well as outside of the beltway and spend a lot
of time interacting with. we are not speaking from some private annual that we have crafted. we are just an echo chamber of the people's voices that we have worked with. >> i think it's important to note that the law of the jungle is either be eat. all politics is defined to be defined in forever reason most republican leaders chose not to try to nationalize this electi election. politics like nature -- a vacuum so the conservative movement, the conservatives of the national state and local level stepped forward and took on the mantle. took on the task of nationalizing this election around limited government constitutional government national security, all the issues we have talked about here and when the voters went to the polls yesterday that was the
issue that was uppermost on their minds. it was the issues that conservatives at all levels of the country have been communicating to the voters. any other questions? yes sir. >> if the republican majority fails to pursue legislation to support the voters to put them there what happens then? >> we will hold them accountable. we expect them to live up to their promises and if they don't live up to their promises we will do what we have done for the last five and a half years and that is to make sure that people in washington understand what the people in the rest of the country want to see truly up in this country. we want more personal freedom. they want economic freedom and we wanted debt-free future for herself and her children and grandchildren. >> okay i think that does it. thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. thank you.
the latino victory project called over 5000 latino voters in the days before tuesday's midterm election to find out the key issues that decided how they voted. a panel examined this pull in tuesday's election results. speakers include pollsters from the group latino decisions along with representatives from the national council of bourassa people for the american way and elected officials. this is an hour and a half. >> i'm going to squeeze in here and welcome you. my name is henry manias and the people on graham one of the cofounders of latino victory project.
my father who was an activist used to tell me that the movement of the people begins with the steps of just one person. this conversation that we are having this morning is really part of the evolution that has been taking place within our communities for a very long time and the people who are on this podium have been people have devoted their entire lives to the expression of the voice of the latino community so i'm very honored to be joining each and every one of them this morning and thankful to you who reflect our voice for being here this morning for this conversation. we were happy to partner with frank sharry and his organization to undertake undertake this pull went to convene this meeting so let me introduce to you frank sharry. [applause] >> thank you. good afternoon and good morning to those on the west coast who
are watching by livestreamed and c-span. welcome to all of you in the room. we are very excited about today's program. we really want to lift up the voices of latino voters. we do these election polls for a particular reason. the exit polls are good at something, many things actually in terms of talking to all voters about who they voted for and so forth but they do a notoriously terrible job at capturing some groups like latinos and have long been beset by controversy and debate about the methodology used and i'm hoping that gary and matt will be able to address that to understand the reason we do need the latino voter election poll is so we can really capture the behavior at the polls and their motivations for coming to the polls and reduced something unusual this time. we are also going to look at those who decided not to vote what were some of the motivations and factors involved
in that. therefore returned our focus to the behavior of latino voters in the 2014 midterms i also want to make a few comments. we all worked very hard on immigration reform and there were some things that came out of last night's election that surprised us and were some good news for us. number one the exit polls are pretty good talking to all voters not subgroups and they asked voters where they came down on the question of legal status versus deportation. contrary to conventional wisdom there has been a drop in support for legal status over deportation. the results nationwide were 57-39 margin showing strong durable support for legal stat status. the issue of the salience of immigration was also tested. it appears that republicans
listed immigration reform is a top issue more than other vote voters. it does seem to us that it reveals the dynamic that we are quite familiar with in the world of immigration reform which is that immigration reform, legal status is a winner with the public and yet there is a strong loud but not particularly large base of the republican party that is currently opposed to it. when you see candidates demagogy and the issue of immigration as we saw in a number of races this year we see it as their, part of their base turnout strategy not a strategy devoted to swing voters because swing voters like most democrats are indeed if favorite of legal status. the dynamic but also we want to highlight in a new hampshire senator's race we have one of the least diverse states in the country. as senator jane jahim who reigned -- leaned into supporting immigration reform up against a formidable campaigner
scott brown to fear-mongering about isis and ebola staple of this effort and she was rewarded for the victory despite those efforts of people like immigrant groups and folks like gloria ingram and jeff sessions really made the top things that they were focused on and really wanted scott brown victory. it didn't happen. but then finally in what we are going to plummet how about the democrats? they seem to be cautious when it came to issues of immigration reform this year and we would suggest that didn't work out too well for them. without further ado let me tell you who's up on the stage and introduce our key presenters from the latino division. on the dais here with me starting from my left and you're right we have yanira merino the director of policy and legislative affairs the delay of
educational fun. we have been monterroso executive director of me familiar la raza and janet marguia the national council of -- and randy borntrager and the campaign director for the afl-cio. without further ado let me turn it over to matt barreto and gary segura the cofounders. >> first of all let me say to the polling partners think you for the opportunity to do this work particularly to janet and
henry and frank in your organizations for taking a lead and for the polling partners who are participating in the study. we think this is an important way to make sure there is a clear record of what latino voters felt in the elections, something we have been doing for several cycles. on behalf of my partners and the analysts of latino decision we are very happy to be here. all right let's get to it. so we are going to start by talking about the polls and methodology. the poll was conducted in 10 states plus the site samples the site sample so we the site sample so we could have awaited view of the entire country. 4200 individuals were interviewed, high propensity certain voters and i will come back to that in a moment. interview from october 29 to
november 3 the national nominal margin of error and the corrective margin of error plus or minus 1.9% in the state margins of error of plus or minus 4.9%. what is an election need full? resample extreme high propensity voters. that is individuals who have voted on every occasion since the 2006 election if they were registered in that period and people who registered since the last election. we then ask each of those individuals once we get them on the line if they have already voted by absentee or an early vote station or if they are absolutely sued -- absolutely certain to vote. we validated that as an 80% positive hit rate meaning 88% of the people we talked to to vote on election day.
all callers are live and there's no local polling. we call on both landlines and cell phones in the latino community. the top point we want to convey to you today is under investment in latinos latino center issues contributed to a different -- difficult night for democrats and the mostly white -- were up in something that has been true of us when used with the national summary. latinos were on the losing end of electoral context and most of the influence states. the latino margin of the two-party vote was likely outside the margin of victory and was pivotal in the states of rhode island connecticut colorado the governor's race in virginia and for the senate election. across most contest the latino vote share in 2014 was less democratic and two, four and six years ago. this is of course an important finding.
so let's talk about the latino vote in 2014. for the house of representatives we found about 70% of latinos cast their vote for democrats in the two-party vote compared to 27% for the republicans. there is obviously variation across the state illinois being the most democratic in florida being the least democratic. that is consistent with past trends. for the united states senate we found a party boat distribution of 67-28 with a fairly moderate number of individual casting for third-party largely plussed-up by kansas in our study but there were third-party candidates in a number of the races. again state-level variation was pretty wide. dick durbin as he conceded very well in illinois and kay hagan in north carolina that the least
well of any democratic or independent nominee. the view of the democratic par party, we has to respond that's what they thought about the democrats attitude towards latinos and the democrats truly care, really don't care much at all or are even hostile? as you can see 40% report that democrats truly care about the latino community. that's the lowest number we have observed since we have been taking, asking these questions for the last couple of years. 36% either say they don't care much or are hostile. by comparison 42% that don't care too much and 23% are hostile of the republican party or in meaning 65% of latino voters disinterested or hostile wad 22% of republicans are caring for the community and its needs. why latinos voted. matt is going to tell you about that.
>> thanks gary and thanks everyone for your interest tod today. as gary said we have a methodology that is definitely different from the national exit poll which we think does do a good job of interviewing latinos. i'm going to talk about that a little bit later in another segment. for now let's talk about why latinos voted in what brought latinos to the poll of polls. we asked the question we have been asking since 2010. i heard analysis this morning that said something like some other republican voters in senate races, 95% of them said the reason they were voting was to vote against the democratic agenda or against obama. many voters especially white voters were really motivated by bipartisan reasons. we have a start contrast to the latino committed. the national number they are, 37% of latinos the highest number said the reason that they were voting in 2014 was to
support the latino community. in contrast 34% said the reason they showed up on election day was to support a democratic candidate and 15% supported the republican candidate but the largest reason was they showed up to vote to support the latino community which was a strong testament to the work that people are doing reaching out and encouraging latinos to participate. once again you can see the variation. it's very high and almost all the states but in some states like illinois and california 45 and 43% an extremely high number of latinos said they were voting to support the latino community. overall we found 41% of latinos said they had been in contact. certainly there is less mobilization than their is an presidential years but again there is much more to be done with this community and getting those numbers up higher.
people often ask gary and i about the quote low latino turnout in the drop off of latino turnout. only four out of 10 latino voters are being contacted and there's much work to be done and getting out the latino vote in most of those candidates and campaigns looking to engage our community. who did most of the engaging here? we asked for the 41% and among the 41% who were contacted, 506% said it was democratic campaign, 35% said it was republican campaign and interestingly 32% a third of latinos said they came from a community organization. that's much higher than you will see for white americans who overwhelmingly receive their contact from one of the two major contacts. for latinos one third of the contacts are coming from latino organizations.
nationally what were the most important issues? at the start of our survey we asked an open-ended question asking people what is the number one issue that you want congress and the president to address? 45% said immigration reform is the number one issue. 34% said jobs and economy. other issues that were right up there at the top for education reform improving schools and health care people talking about health care expansion. gary will talk about it later. medicaid was a hot issue in many states. ..
>> >> we know many people in our community have jobs that don't always enable them to have extra time off even though they should be legally required they don't have that time they may work extra jobs. 25% of nonvoters report scheduling problems additional 24% did not have the basic information or know where to go.
some very basic things can help improve a turnout among latinos. some said -- 19 percent of the refresh treated by bad candidates and 14% said they did not have the proper boater photo identification and a sizable number thought they didn't have that information. reviewing the parties of the voters of the nonvoters would get the starting point they're much lower to only 33 percent truly cares earlier that was 40% only 12 percent feels the republican party cares. you can see the number in the middle and 22% thinks they are hot style the republican says is a source
42% think they don't care in 28% think their cost file. 70% of respondents and 49 percent about the democrats so that nonvoters have lower opinions. when do we have faced the most is what impact does the president to lay on executive action have? and it is speculative with the nonvoter sample how that delayed made them feel. 60 percent said that made them feel less enthusiastic only 23 percent and made them feel more enthusiastic so for the first time evidence that for some of the voters there was their reason they were less
enthusiastic. but finally we think the nonvoters can become voters. end if he attacks executive orders before the end of this year does that make you less enthusiastic about supporting the democratic party? 60 percent says yes. what may have dampened their enthusiasm and 2014 there is a road for word to bring the nonvoters back into the electric. -- electorate. >> the surveys were conducted on registered voters and shows not to anyway. so these people could be motivated back into the electorate.
glass-steagall what is the most important issue facing the community and with the exception of florida where jobs and the economy outpaced immigration that is the most frequently provided answer. we'll allow all respondents to give to issues and immigration was more likely to be mentioned as one of them in every state except florida national eliot was immigration. asking a direct question how important is the issue to your decision to vote and who to vote for? one third of our respondents said it was the most important issue to make a choice and 34 percent said is one of the most important issues so 67 percent said immigration as near the top for at the top when casting a ballot. this is not surprising we
have been reported number similar to this but we keep asking folks you know, someone who was an undocumented immigrant? and with our poll 56 percent of respondents know someone who with undocumented and as the consequence it is very important and other polling more than half the time their members of their family it is the salient issue. despite overwhelming advantage said democratic share of almost every election was down so back in the summer we ran a poll for the action fund if they would respond if the president did not take executive action. at that time we found a 54%
of our respondents said the voter turnout will go down and 57 of the respondents said that support for tougher credit candidates would go down that was taken back in june of this year and here is what happened on election day. nationally looking at the house vote we see a change of 2010 of a decline of 20 percentage points if you go down the states you can see some of what big numbers of a shocking decline with the two parties support from nevada and texas a substantial decline in colorado from just two years ago. the only place with an increase is florida from 2010 but it is a decline. so the democratic share
declined everywhere we looked. democratic share of gubernatorial votes once again with the exception of florida where charlie crist got more in every other circumstance there was said dramatic decline of the tea party vote. in nevada we see a shocking decline we're compared to four years ago democratic nominees got 32 percent less of a latino vote than four years ago. to put into context the governor ran virtually unopposed in got more than 70 percent of the tea party vote statewide. if we look at the senate election we see once again
with your exception there is a decline of all circumstances to have a way to compare in the previous ways. and as you can see given the results of the elections it is like rearranging deck chairs on a titanic. we take up closer look at the key states. >> we had information about all 10 states posted on our web site that latino vote 2014.com. we will not go over every single results but starting in colorado that got the most attention on the senate side. we pulled strong support for democratic candidates but these were declined from
previous years. in particular 2012 was one of the strongest dates for barack obama with 87 percent of latinos so while they did well outpacing republican opponents it was a considerable drop from 87% but the number one issue was immigration at 45% 16% education and 11% health care so much you though voters said immigration on their mind when they went to the poll. we think there was some mistakes made because of it we have seen in pre-election polls. asking a very specific question about the candidates in colorado. day you know, exactly where udall stance on immigration
to the support comprehensive immigration reform or oppose it? or you don't know? forty-six% of latinos identified udall as pro but 53 percent had the wrong position for udall. for gardner 23 percent believed he supported a comprehensive immigration reform we know that is rhetoric it is different as compared to his voting history and 30 percent knew he was opposed. but those you did not know what his position on immigration reform. but that was the top issues cited we think there is a mistake an opportunity to talk to latinos that would
create a clear contrast. if you go back to look at the out reach that deal obama campaign did in colorado almost everyone of that adds talked about the contrasts between president obama and governor romney. colorado is the story of a under mobilization the prairies' virtually were unmentioned in the udall campaign as he receives some of the criticism to not have a diverse set of issues. they're even uncertain of the positioning that they have done very well recently that they did not do as well as some historic benchmarks. those that have gotten attention of those preelection questions the house ballett as 63 percent
democratic with the nine-point drop over 2012 with 72 percent. but the 63 percent is the lowest mark of any of the candidates of the democratic side with the latino vote. this is not surprising to us in a pre-election poll in north carolina. 45% just three weeks of their undecided they did not know which candidate they were with. 57% the highest of any state cited immigration as a top issue. it is a very emigrant heavy state. and this is on their minds in 2014 they can receive the
smallest share because we suggest the hagan position had something to do with the performance. that she was identified as one of the folks whose adjusted to the president to delay the action so moderate voters would not be worried in theory but as we opened with it revealed a clear majority support moving forward with the immigration reform. talking about nevada, the hispanic candidate for lieutenant governor receives 71 percent as strong performance but in the governor's election just receiving 52 percent. the high water mark for the hispanic republicans and a
significant improvement over the numbers and 2010. but goodman did not have extensive funding and virtually unfunded the sandoval went into the election with very high popularity ratings. and he conducted some hispanic reach putting money into esl, a driver's permit bill, a more moderate rhetoric and signed medicaid expansion. he was rewarded with 44 percent of the latino vote. the migration was the top percentage also education receives a high manchin. why did sandoval improve his lead so substantially? he had significant policy actions that were priorities
english and not very many interviews that all in the rio grande valley of texas and for those who want to follow up we have tried for many years for transparency to tell is what precincts there selecting how representative, water the demographics and they have not provided that. we provide that we would like to know a few more details. why is a 42% from? with the 100 percent of the counties reporting greenough there were not very active in south or west texas. here is just a couple of counties that are majority latino, and looked at the numbers for a 21, a 23, 26
if he draws in the low 20s if 90 percent latino counties there is no possible way he got 42 percent of the book that has to do with the methodology the exit polls used their getting a wrong portrait of the latino voters i wanted to take some extra time do draw attention to that. texas is one we can very easily get data to show this but we will continue to look at precinct returns to compare our results from past years to validate when you look at the real data that that he no decision was quite accurate. >> finally i will wrap it up with other issues not related to immigration and also a few thoughts about
thinking forward into the next cycle. we ask correspondence with the best approach was to use of the federal budget deficit. raising taxes on the wealthy cutting only spending or doing a combination with spending cuts. it is again the case that latinos show some thinking on this with a 35% population nationwide who favor a balanced approach and another 35% to believe tax increases have not draconian spending cuts so 70 percent of latino voters think tax increases need to be part of the solution to the budget deficit. the minimum wage was off about it -- on the ballot. latinos would love to raise the minimum wage they favor
that against 18 percent opposed there are some state variations between illinois and colorado it is modest to the overall majority that favors increasing the minimum wage. meet those states that had not expanded the medicaid program if it should be. those that favor the expansion of the medicaid program only 15 percent oppose that. with kansas' 81% favored the expansion of medicaid the low water mark was 72% so clearly it is a huge majority in favor of expanding medicaid. how important is it for the federal government to reduce carbon position?
35 percent said it is extremely important and another 33 percent said it is very important. 68% that showed up for election in 2014 say climate changes barry or extremely important and should be addressed. looking forward to the 2016 cycle that what play dead meaningful role is in on the table asking on the election eve poll if president obama enacts this by the end of the year without making it more or less enthusiastic as you can see 47 percent of respondents said it is much more enthusiastic and some said someone at compared to 20% in the negative direction if the president takes action also what happens if they tried to block the president from
taking executive action? sixty-seven% of respondents and it would make a much less enthusiastic:24% of latino voters thought that was a small idea -- india. one of the big issues 40 percent of respondents agreed with the following terms that the g.o.p. is so anti-immigrant and latino it is hard for me to consider supporting them. 40% on the other hand, 24% said they generally agree and most issues and 22% said they disagree on some issues but would consider supporting them in the future so that portion that
has produced the republicans had can have access they just need to try by producing policies. also asked about the 2016 election in generic terms if held today would you vote for the democratic candidate or the republican candidate? fifty-two% said democrat compared to the 20% voting republican 28 percent are undecided. not super surprising. we have not attached and name to those but a sizable vantage for a director at going into 2016. what is the take away? that latino vote can choose to grow dramatically but they need to be mobilized many clearly feel ignored by
the democratic party or taken advantage of. by contrast many feel their directly under attack by the g.o.p.. in some respects i think that how both parties react to the electorate will continue to shape how the key electorate grows in the coming years. all of the results latino vote 2014 and that the partner web site with the accord to hearing from of view for question and answer >> we will get some brief responses from our to original sponsors then we will open in 4q and a then
we will incorporate our other partners appear to make sure they get a chance. but we want to hear your questions to make sure we are clear on those watching on line can submit their questions. first we will hear from henry who is the co-founder of the latino victory project that said they wanted to work on this and we're so thrilled their organization exist. they have done great work this cycle and more generous enough to sponsor this event so let's have comments from henry. of. >> the takeaway is the idea that we vote for the people who understand our community and protect our community and grow our community. when restart the latino victory project with the idea whinnied our country's
history the jedi delegates that leadership to anyone else. period. we need to understand how our community is to the electoral process and the viewpoint of candidates toward our community, and with an eye to the future it is a viable and strong bundle of information that we will build upon to figure out how we need to organize. around the issues that are important to our community with an eye to developing the next-generation of leadership. of one to think the principles and carry and matt to bring this information forward either accord to sharing this stage
so we can answer these questions. talking to janet she was a very important part of the conversations that took place in the very beginning discussing if there should be an organization like the latino victory project. >> if you don't mind i will stand up. thank you so much. i do want to express my deep appreciation to my team and of course, to the latino victory fund. we have been supporting a variation of this since 2006. thanks to the history of the groundbreaking work, we
believe we have an accurate assessment of our communities vote. the election results were decisive and now the post-mortem has begun. i believe this election was a lost opportunity for democrats instead of embracing their records in our community, too many senate democrats ignored or ran away from us. even in the states where our vote could have made a difference the region mobilization efforts were anemic. this proved costly last night. republicans had a great night and i think it is important to note that but most republicans as demonstrated are on the wrong side of the key priorities regardless of the
party affiliation such as immigration, health care and minimum-wage. the best news of the night is organizations like our partners continue to help eligible latinos naturalize and register to vote. en ceo are registered 120,000 new voters this year and contacted more than 300,000 high california texas north carolina and i would georgette idaho the hispanic electorate continues to grow. precise numbers will not be available for some time but the turnout will be larger than the previous despite the headwinds in 2014. there are three takeaways
from this election. number one, the midterms have come and gone and the clock has started taking on the 2016 race. there will never again be an electoral map and more importantly an electorate as favorable to the public -- republican party as 2014 and 2016 the demographics will come home to roost for republicans. if they continue on this trajectory i think they will have elected the last republican president for the foreseeable future. latino voters priorities must be reflected in republan